“This is an authentic chain of transmission, and Abu Bakr al-Hanafi was named ‘Abd al-Kabir ibn ‘Abd al-Majid al-Basri.”
I say: It has another route from Abu Hurayrah, recorded by al-Tirmidhi (2/50), Ahmad (2/31), and Ibn ‘Asakir in The History of Damascus (9/247/1), through Ja‘far ibn Sulayman, from Abu Tariq, from al-Hasan, from him. Al-Tirmidhi said: “This is a singular hadith; we know it only through the narration of Ja‘far ibn Sulayman. Al-Hasan did not hear anything from Abu Hurayrah. Abu ‘Ubaydah al-Naji narrated this hadith from al-Hasan as his own statement, without mentioning Abu Hurayrah from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.”
I say: This Abu Tariq was al-Sa‘di, and he is unknown, as stated in al-Taqrib.
It also has a third route from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, recorded by Ibn Majah (4217), through Abu Raja’, from Bard ibn Sinan, from Makhul, from Wathilah ibn al-Asqa‘, from him.
I say: This is a chain whose narrators are trustworthy, except that Makhul and Abu Raja’—whose name was Muhriz ibn ‘Abdullah al-Jazari—were both practising tadlis and used an ambiguous “from” transmission. From this, you may know that al-Busiri’s statement in al-Zawa’id (fol. 260/1), “This is a good chain of transmission,” is not good!
- “The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, never struck a servant or a woman with his hand. Nor did the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, ever strike anything with his hand except while striving in Allah’s cause. Whenever he was given a choice between two matters, he would choose the easier of them, so long as it did not involve sin; but if it involved sin, he was the furthest of people from it. And he never took revenge for any personal wrong done to him, unless the sacred limits of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, were violated; then he would take revenge for Allah’s sake.”